Why do you believe in Jesus Christ and not Allah or Buddha?

I don’t know enough about Hinduism to answer this properly, but you may have a point. If my grandmother had remained in India, perhaps I would have been a Hindu. On the other hand, if she’d done so, I suspect I would have wound up with a very different set of genes and life experiences, so while the person typing this might have been my grandmother’s granddaughter, she may well not have been me in any recognizable form.

I’ve been an active Christian for about 30 years now. Who I am is shaped by that faith and the studying I’ve done as part of it. It would take a lot of hard work and study for my knowledge of and experience with Hinduism to approach that which I have of Christianity. Meanwhile, Christianity does a very good job of supplying my spiritual and emotional needs. I’ve even been helped out financially by churches once in a while. What I believe I am obligated to do as a person and what I am obligated not to do have been shaped by Christianity to the point where, while the form it takes may differ from that it takes for others, it fits me perfectly.

Yes, I think there are environmental factors in what religion one chooses and I acknowledge that influence in my choice. Who’s to say that in an alternate universe I’m not defending Islam somewher just as ardently as I defend Christianity here? On the other hand, this is what I am, and it suits me. It need suit no one else except God.


There is nothing in Jesus’ life that is attested by any eyewitness account. Not one word of the New Testament is written by anyone who ever met Jesus.

In addition, the “multiple” sources you refer to are interdependant in some cases (which means they aren’t really “multiple”) and they contradict each other in other cases.

Also, some of what is alleged in the gospels can be flatly refuted by more legitimate evidence which serves to further discredit them as historically reliable.

Of course, claims about miraculous events put a serious strain on their credibility anyway.


Again, cite? And what do you construe as being more ‘legitimate’ or ‘historically reliable’?

*Originally posted by dwalin *
Well, why don’t you cite something that you think was written by an eyewitness and I’ll tell you why it couldn’t have been. I’m not going to go book by book it would take too long and it would be boring.

Suffice it to say that I’m expressing a majority historical opinion on this and that it’s largely based on the late authorship of the books as well as the language they were written in. None of the gospels could have been written by contemporaries. The earliest letters of Paul are closer to the date of the crucifixion but Paul never actually met Jesus.

Josephus, for one, as well as any other writers or historians without a religious or mythological agenda.

Some examples of history refuting the NT are Luke’s “census of the world” (never happened), Herod’s slaughter of the innocents (never happened) and the trial before the Sanhedrin (which is riddled with factual and procedural errors).

The “miracles” also cannot be taken seriously without some very persuasive evidence.

Ahh, Sven. If I weren’t already happily married, I’d marry you. What an eloquent post.

I have to keep that in mind for future discussions …

I did NOT know that!! But, someone beat you to it, and I had my ignorance on that subject fixed already. I do apologize to any Budhists in this forum though for “assuming” that it was the same.

As to your second statement/question? Doesn’t bother me. I’m not a “protestant religion”. As a former baptist, I get extremely annoyed at the antics of some people who are “fellow” believers.

At any rate, I don’t know what the deal is with the “Jaaaysus” weird babytalking televangelist thing. When I pray, it’s to God. Not sure if that answers your question, but then, I’m not a fundie, or your “typical” christian.